Carlos Pena v. City of Los Angeles, California

In recent years, this Court has seen petitions where plaintiffs have asserted Takings Clause claims related to destructive law-enforcement activity. See Slaybaugh v. Rutherford County, 145 S. Ct. 1959 (2025); Baker v. City of McKinney, 145 S. Ct. 11 (2024); Lech v. Jackson, 141 S. Ct. 160 (2020). Justices Sotomayor and Gorsuch have recognized that these cases “raise[] an important question that has divided the courts of appeals,” Baker, 145 S. Ct. at 11, yet they felt it was a question that “would benefit from further percolation in the lower courts prior to this Court’s intervention.” Id. at 13. Since then, the Ninth Circuit has weighed in, and the Seventh Circuit has reaffirmed its previous approach, adding to the doctrinal disarray in the lower courts. The Questions Presented are:

1. Whether the government is exempt from liability under the Takings Clause when law enforcement officers intentionally destroy an innocent person’s property in the course of attempting to apprehend a fugitive.

2. Whether the doctrine of “public necessity” is an exception to the Takings Clause.